SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Were Albert Einstein and Leonardo da Vinci born brilliant or did they acquire their intelligence through effort? No one knows for sure, but telling people the latter – that hard work trumps genes – causes instant changes in the brain and may make them more willing to strive for success, indicates a new study from Michigan State University.
The findings suggest the human brain is more receptive to the message that intelligence comes from the environment, regardless of whether it’s true. And this simple message, said lead investigator Hans Schroder, may ultimately prompt us to work harder.
http://msutoday.msu.edu/news/2014/nature-or-nurture-its-all-about-the-message/
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Now KEN and BARBIE are PERMANENTLY ADDICTED to MIND-ALTERING DRUGS ...
(Score: 2, Insightful) by anubi on Monday September 08 2014, @05:02AM
I get the idea that each and every one of us has some special little thing we do really well - problem is we usually are doing something else to economically survive.
I am sure Einstein's exposure to everyone's ideas as he worked as a clerk in the patent office gave him a good leg up on the inventive process. He managed to work into something he was good at. I have heard rumors he had the most unusual of forgetfulness problems as he was so fixated on his science study... I guess they have another name for it today. Autism. maybe?
I see it in myself - I see it in others too. Seems like we are all tools in the box. There are a few things we are really good at, however society may not place much value on it. There are a few things we can do if we put a significant effort in it ( and we won't enjoy doing it either!!! ). And there are a lot of things we will screw up so bad it would have been better if we had never touched the thing.
We usually find out what those things are after we have been around a bit and wised up as to what to mess with and what to leave alone.
And there is the rub... there is often no call for that which we have the gift to do. I believe a few very lucky people end up having the output of their obsession wanted by someone else. The result is most of us go ahead and do our obsession anyway, but its just for personal gratification, not profit.
Then do something else that we are not all that good at "for the man" to get financial support.
If it wasn't for the war, and our intense need to make weapons, how many "famous scientists" would have never been known?
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by nyder on Monday September 08 2014, @05:19AM
... If it wasn't for the war, and our intense need to make weapons, how many "famous scientists" would have never been known?
You know, we should try it that way, lets go a few centuries without war and see what happens?
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by davester666 on Monday September 08 2014, @06:06AM
So, you've found your skill. Posting nonesence on the internet.
Your mother would be so proud.
(Score: 2) by Geezer on Monday September 08 2014, @12:37PM
Your mother should teach you to spell "nonsense".
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Thexalon on Monday September 08 2014, @02:39PM
My guess on this is that scientists with the same funding without a war going on would have done roughly the same work as scientists who did have a war hanging over their heads. For example, Einstein's most important work happened before the war, von Braun did about as much rocketry research after WW II as during it, Turing did a great deal of important work both before and after the war, and so forth. There's a good chance that the effect of the war was diverting scientists from what they wanted to work on towards what would help with the war effort.
If you want to maximize scientific output, the formula for doing that appears to be:
1. Set up a nice, comfortable building or set of buildings.
2. Hire a bunch of really smart people to work in that building.
3. Place minimal limits on what those people can do with their time.
4. To the degree possible, give them the equipment they're asking for.
That's the formula used at the Library of Alexandria, the Baghdad House of Wisdom, Oxford University, and lots of other very successful research institutions. It really works - those smart people talking to each other and trying things and sharing ideas and messing around creates really useful results. You're trying to create an environment where the introduction is: "Here is your office and laboratory. The supply closet is here - if you can't find what you need, ask Bill in purchasing. The cafeteria is here - most of your colleagues head down there for lunch between 11:30 and 1. Any questions? Alright, get to work!"
The problem is that the sort of people who want to control others can't stand the fact that they'll end up paying and supplying people to sit around trying to make Space Wars work on an old PDP-10. Because that can't possibly lead to anything useful, at least in the short term.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.